JCB logo
MBL International Corporation
  Home | Help | Feedback | Subscriptions | Archive | Search | Table of Contents

Published online 13 June 2005. doi:10.1083/jcb1696rr2
The Rockefeller University Press, 0021-9525 $8.00
JCB, Volume 169, Number 6, 836-836
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF, 493K)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Services
Right arrow Email this article
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new content in the JCB
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via CrossRef
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Nyberg, K. A.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by Nyberg, K. A.
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Facebook   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

Research Roundup

Weaker is better


Antigenic therapy researchers have long relied on repeated dosing of high-affinity ligands to inactivate select T cells by causing overstimulation that leads to apoptosis. Contrary to this strategy, Bingye Han, Pau Serra, Pere Santamaria (University of Calgary, Alberta, Canada), and colleagues now show that low-affinity peptides targeting autoreactive T cells protect mice more effectively against diabetes than do high-affinity peptides.

Peptides that are similar in sequence to a portion of islet-specific glucose-6-phosphatase catalytic subunit-related protein (IGRP) that strongly bound to autoreactive T cells nearly completely obliterated this T cell pool in mice. But lurking in the background were smaller pools of autoreactive T cells that were impervious to the high-affinity peptide, yet reactive against other portions of IGRP. Once their competition had been eliminated, these cells emerged to fill in the vacant niche. The high-affinity peptide thus failed to protect against diabetes.

Low-affinity peptides, by contrast, selectively eliminated the most menacing of IGRP-reactive T cells, while maintaining a substantial population of more benign T cells that recognized, but were not harmed by, the peptides. By becoming established as the dominant population, the nonpathogenic T cells effectively blocked more reactive but less prevalent T cells from taking over.

Now with a better grasp on the fine balance between ligand binding and dosage, Santamaria says, "targeting multiple epitopes simultaneously is likely to be more practical than finding the optimal dose for deletion of high-avidity subtypes while preserving low-avidity subtypes." {rr_end}

Reference:

Han, B., et al. 2005. Nat. Med. doi:10.1038/nm1250.



Kara A. Nyberg

knyberg{at}nasw.org


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Facebook Facebook   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?



This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF, 493K)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Services
Right arrow Email this article
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new content in the JCB
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via CrossRef
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Nyberg, K. A.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by Nyberg, K. A.
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Facebook   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?


  Home | Help | Feedback | Subscriptions | Archive | Search | Table of Contents